“Yerkir” says that the ongoing dialogue between Serzh Sarkisian and Ter-Petrosian is exposing their “ideological similarities.” “It can entail new and serious adjustments on the political scene,” writes the paper. “It’s not just about the two presidents’ preference of a tactical struggle full of complex moves, which Ter-Petrosian figuratively described as a chess match.” The paper says that with his speech at the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) this week Sarkisian for the first admitted his reverence of Ter-Petrosian. Ter-Petrosian, for his part, “overtly justified the president’s domestic and external initiatives” in his interview with the “Moskovskie Novosti” newspaper published on Thursday, claims “Yerkir.”
“Chorrord Inknishkhanutyun” says Armenian politics is dominated by the current and former presidents because they have different approaches to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and other key issues facing Armenia. “Each of the three presidents, regardless of the degree of their legitimacy, personal traits and so on, is the carrier of one of those approaches,” explains the opposition daily. And there is simply no fourth approach.”
In an interview with “Zhamanak,” Davit Hovannisian, a well-known scholar and political analyst, says that chances of “serious progress” at the Armenian-Azerbaijani summit in Kazan are slim. “Especially given that Azerbaijan’s leadership constantly makes statements that do not give one reason for trust,” he says. “In any case, I also don’t think that it is beneficial for Azerbaijan’s leadership to unfreeze this conflict.”
“Is our society prepared for any solution to the Karabakh conflict?” “Hraparak” asks in an editorial. “When you look at opinions circulated within the society it looks as though no solution can satisfy us today. No, there is certainly one option that would satisfy all of us: if Nagorno-Karabakh is declared independent together with Lachin and other territories adjacent to it … All other solutions would be rejected in Armenia and Karabakh. Even if an inch of the security zone is given back to Azerbaijan, war veterans will make a fuss and declare that the lands occupied by blood must not be returned. In short, Armenia’s authorities and especially Serzh Sarkisian are in serious trouble. He will have to sign up to something which Levon Ter-Petrosian and Robert Kocharian avoided.”
(Aghasi Yenokian)
“Chorrord Inknishkhanutyun” says Armenian politics is dominated by the current and former presidents because they have different approaches to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and other key issues facing Armenia. “Each of the three presidents, regardless of the degree of their legitimacy, personal traits and so on, is the carrier of one of those approaches,” explains the opposition daily. And there is simply no fourth approach.”
In an interview with “Zhamanak,” Davit Hovannisian, a well-known scholar and political analyst, says that chances of “serious progress” at the Armenian-Azerbaijani summit in Kazan are slim. “Especially given that Azerbaijan’s leadership constantly makes statements that do not give one reason for trust,” he says. “In any case, I also don’t think that it is beneficial for Azerbaijan’s leadership to unfreeze this conflict.”
“Is our society prepared for any solution to the Karabakh conflict?” “Hraparak” asks in an editorial. “When you look at opinions circulated within the society it looks as though no solution can satisfy us today. No, there is certainly one option that would satisfy all of us: if Nagorno-Karabakh is declared independent together with Lachin and other territories adjacent to it … All other solutions would be rejected in Armenia and Karabakh. Even if an inch of the security zone is given back to Azerbaijan, war veterans will make a fuss and declare that the lands occupied by blood must not be returned. In short, Armenia’s authorities and especially Serzh Sarkisian are in serious trouble. He will have to sign up to something which Levon Ter-Petrosian and Robert Kocharian avoided.”
(Aghasi Yenokian)